Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 73 references

Computable Poincar\'e--Friedrichs constants for the $L^{p}$ de~Rham complex over convex domains and domains with shellable triangulations

T0 review · 2 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper constructs bounded potentials for the gradient, curl, and divergence over domains with shellable triangulations, with explicitly computable constants that yield upper bounds on Poincaré–Friedrichs constants and lower bounds on ve

desk verdict A real advance in computable constants for the Lp de Rham complex, but the shellable-triangulation part rests on a geometric lemma with a min/max error that breaks the proof of Theorem 9.3 as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.06741 v1 pith:DQWEOTSM submitted 2025-08-08 math.NA cs.NA

Théophile Chaumont-Frelet , Martin Werner Licht , Martin Vohralík This is my paper
classification math.NAcs.NA MSC 65N3035P1558A10
keywords Poincaré–FriedrichsconstantsLpdeRhamcomplexshellabletriangulationspotentialoperatorsexteriorderivativecomputableboundsMaxwelleigenvaluesconvexdomains
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper establishes that on a domain with a shellable triangulation, every differential form $u \in W^p\Lambda^k(\Omega)$ whose exterior derivative $du$ is in $L^p$ admits a potential $w \in W^p\Lambda^k(\Omega)$ with $dw = du$ and $\lVert w\rVert_{L^p(\Omega)} \le C(\mathcal{T},p,k)\lVert du\rVert_{L^p(\Omega)}$, where the constant is explicitly computable from mesh geometry. For bounded convex domains, the paper gives analogous explicit constants for the entire $L^p$ de Rham complex, independent of the Lebesgue exponent $p$ but depending on dimension and form degree. These operator norms are upper bounds for Poincaré–Friedrichs constants and, in the Hilbert case $p=2$, translate directly into lower bounds on eigenvalues of scalar and vector Laplacians, including Maxwell eigenvalues. The gradient, curl, and divergence operators are all treated as instances of the exterior derivative, so the argument covers them uniformly in two and three dimensions.

What carries the argument

The argument runs on three objects. First, a shellable triangulation: an ordering of the top-dimensional simplices such that each new simplex meets the union of the previous ones in a non-empty union of codimension-one faces, so that gluing can proceed along whole faces rather than along edges or vertices. Second, regularized Poincaré and Bogovskii-type integral operators: averaged potential operators whose Lebesgue-space operator norms give the convex-domain constants of Theorem 6.2. Third, the bi-Lipschitz reflection $\Xi_1$ of Proposition 8.3, a piecewise affine map from a simplex into the complement of that simplex within its local star, identity on the interface, with explicit bounds on

What would settle it

Verify Lemma 8.1 explicitly on a tetrahedron split by barycentric subdivision of an edge: check that each sub-simplex has volume $\mathrm{vol}(T)/(\ell+1)$ and that the claimed height-vector scalings hold. Then, on a non-convex boundary star such as the slit-domain patch, compute the actual Jacobian singular values of the piecewise affine reflection $\Xi_1$ and compare them with the stated $C_{5,n,\ell}$ and $C_{6,n,\ell}$ bounds; a violation of either would break the recursive estimate in Theorem 9.3.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that constructive potentials for the exterior derivative exist over domains with shellable triangulations, with operator norms bounded by explicit functions of the triangulation's shape measures, volume ratios, and local star geometry. The construction is inductive: starting from one simplex, each new simplex in a shelling is attached along a union of faces, and a potential on the new simplex is built by pulling back the already-constructed potential from the complement of the simplex inside the completed local star, using a bi-Lipschitz piecewise affine reflection that is the identity on the interface. The recursive norm estimates are then unfolded into a global Poincar

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the geometric reflection estimate in Proposition 8.3, whose proof rests on Lemma 8.1, stated without proof, and on the claim that every local star is star-shaped with respect to a ball of radius $h/(\ell+1)$; if those geometric facts fail, the recursive bound collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any shellable triangulation, gradient, curl, and divergence potentials have computable stability constants obtained from local mesh data, with no need to solve global finite element eigenvalue problems.
  • For $p=2$, the computed upper bounds on Poincaré–Friedrichs constants become lower bounds on Neumann and Dirichlet Laplacian eigenvalues and on Maxwell eigenvalues over the same domain.
  • Local patches (stars) in two- and three-dimensional triangulations are shellable, so finite element vertex, edge, and face patches now admit curl and divergence stability constants where only gradient constants were previously available.
  • For bounded convex domains, the constants cover the full $L^p$ de Rham complex and all $p \in [1,\infty]$, including partial boundary conditions on simplices, which feeds the recursive construction and is of independent interest.
  • The potential operators preserve polynomial differential forms, so the construction is compatible with finite element exterior calculus spaces and can be embedded directly into computational pipelines.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper: the same gluing philosophy should extend to shellable polytopal complexes, and the paper explicitly suggests lumping simplices into polytopal subdomains to counteract the growth of constants with mesh size.
  • Beyond the paper: the numerical examples show overestimation factors that explode with the number of simplices, especially in 3D; this suggests that choosing a shelling that optimizes geometric constants is not merely algorithmic convenience but essential for practical usefulness.
  • Beyond the paper: if the conjectured domination of all $L^p$ de Rham constants by the gradient constant holds for convex domains, then the convex-domain bounds of Theorem 6.2 could be sharpened substantially, and the same sharpening would propagate into the shellable-triangulation estimates.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper constructs linear potential operators for the exterior derivative on two classes of domains: bounded convex domains (regularized Poincaré and Bogovski operators, Theorem 6.2) and domains admitting a shellable simplicial triangulation (Theorems 9.3 and 9.4). The operator norms are bounded by explicitly computable constants depending only on the geometry, yielding upper bounds for Poincaré–Friedrichs constants and lower bounds for vector-Laplacian eigenvalues. Numerical experiments in Section 10 compare the bounds with finite-element reference values on several 2D and 3D examples.

Significance. If the geometric estimates in Section 8 are valid, the shellable-triangulation result is a significant advance: it extends computable Poincaré–Friedrichs constants to curl and divergence operators and to the full Lp scale, including non-convex local patches around reentrant corners, slits, and crossed bricks. The convex-domain part, Theorem 6.2, is a self-contained and parameter-free derivation with explicit constants; it appears sound and has independent value. The numerical examples give an honest assessment of the overestimation factors. However, the central shellable-triangulation claim is not established as written: Proposition 8.2 is false in the stated form, and the main theorem depends on it. The defect is load-bearing but appears repairable within the paper's framework.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 8, Lemma 8.1] The statement of Proposition 8.2 defines h as the maximum height of any vertex of S in any n-simplex of st_T(S), but the proof only supports the radius ϱ at most the minimum height of z_S. In the ℓ=0 case the proof explicitly assumes 'ϱ is at most the minimum height of z_S in any n-simplex'; the containment B_ϱ(z_S)⊆|st_T(S)| can fail for the maximum height. For example, a fan triangulation of a square with a deep notch around an interior vertex can have distance to the closest boundary/notch edge much smaller than the distance to the outer square edge; with h taken as the maximum, B_h(z_S) leaves the star. Proposition 8.3 then requires y∈B_{h/(ℓ+1)}(z_S)⊆st_T(S) and uses the convex hull of T and y to define the reflection; with h as maximum, this premise fails. Consequently Theorem 9.3 is not derived from valid assumptions. Replacing 'maximum' by 'minimum' may repair the argument, but t
  2. [Section 8, Lemma 8.1] Lemma 8.1 is stated without proof, yet it controls the volume relation vol(T')=vol(T)/(ℓ+1), the height-vector relations used in the reduction of Proposition 8.2 to ℓ=0, and the height/Jacobian bounds in Proposition 8.3. Since these relations are directly used in the proof of the reflection estimates, the omission is load-bearing. Please supply a complete proof or a precise reference.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Theorem 6.2, after equation (56)] The line 'w = P_kdu' is inconsistent with the indexing P_k:LpΛ^k(Ω)→WpΛ^{k-1}(Ω). For u∈WpΛ^k(Ω), the correct potential is w=P_{k+1}du, as follows from (56). Please correct the indexing.
  2. [Theorem 9.3, proof] The symbol w''_m is used in 'wm := ewm + w''_m' but is never defined. The subsequent norm estimate indicates the intended construction is wm = Ξ_1^*(w_{m-1}|Um−1) + u|Tm − Ξ_1^*(u|Um−1), i.e., w''_m = u|Tm − Ξ_1^*(u|Um−1). Please clarify or correct the recursion formula.
  3. [Section 8, Proposition 8.2] The phrase 'maximum height of any vertex of S within any n-simplex of st_T(S)' is ambiguous when dim S>0, because the proof concerns heights of the barycenter z_S. The quantity h should be defined explicitly in terms of the heights of z_S (or of the relevant vertices) in the n-simplices of the star.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: convex-domain constants and the shellable-domain recursion are proven from explicit inequalities within the paper; self-citations to [19,25] are inspirational only, and the flagged min/max gap in Proposition 8.2 and unproved Lemma 8.1 are soundness risks, not circularity.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. For convex domains, Theorem 6.2 bounds the operator norms of the regularized Poincaré and Bogovski potentials by explicit constants CPF,P,Ω,k,p = CP(n,k)·vol_{n−1}(S^1)·δ(Ω)^n/vol(Ω)·δ(Ω), obtained from pointwise kernel estimates followed by Young's convolution inequality (Sections 6.2–6.3); the identities u = dP_ku + P_{k+1}du and u = dB_ku + B_{k+1}du are proved by direct computation (Section 6.5, equations (55)–(58)), so w = P_kdu satisfies dw = du with a proved, parameter-free bound. These constants are not fitted to data, and they do not enter the definitions of the quantities they bound. For shellable triangulations, Theorem 9.3 constructs the potential recursively; the extension ewm := u|Tm + Ξ_1^*(wm−1 − u)|Um−1 is written out explicitly, and the bi-Lipschitz reflection Ξ_1 with its Jacobian bounds is constructed and estimated entirely within Proposition 8.3 of the present paper. Citations to [25] (Equations (5.12),(5.14)) and [19] (Equations (6.7),(6.9)) are for analogy/inspiration only ('Similar as in ...'), and the cited works are not assumed to contain the target result; the present proofs of the needed estimates are self-contained. Theorem 9.4 is a general recursion-unfolding identity, not a load-bearing prior result. Two flagged weaknesses in the manuscript affect soundness, not circularity: Lemma 8.1 is stated without proof, and Proposition 8.2 states star-shapedness of the star with respect to B_{h/(ℓ+1)}(z_S) with h the maximum height of any vertex of S in any n-simplex of the star, whereas its proof only establishes the containment for ϱ at most the minimum height of z_S in any n-simplex of st_T(S); if 'maximum' is genuinely intended, the geometric premise of Proposition 8.3 is under-justified and the constants of Section 9 would need recomputation. These are correctness risks, but they do not reduce the claimed bounds to their own inputs. The numerical examples are benchmark comparisons against finite-element eigenvalue proxies, not fits from which the constants are derived. Overall the central claim has independent content and the bounds are derived from explicit inequalities rather than assumed or fitted.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central result adds no free parameters or invented physical entities. All constants are explicit functions of the mesh geometry and dimension. The main assumptions are standard analysis, domain geometry, shellability, and the geometric reflection facts that underpin Proposition 8.3.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math Standard results from real and functional analysis: Holder's inequality, Young's convolution inequality, density of smooth forms (Lemma 5.4 and 5.5), and Rademacher's theorem.
    Used throughout for norm estimates, density arguments, and the p=infinity limit; these are standard background facts not proved in the paper.
  • domain assumption The domain Omega is a bounded open connected set, and when triangulated, the closed triangulation is a manifold triangulation of a manifold with boundary.
    This justifies each (n-1)-face being contained in at most two n-simplices, as used in Lemma 7.7 and in the shelling interface arguments.
  • domain assumption Local stars of simplices in dimensions n <= 3 are topological balls and shellable, via Lemmas 7.2, 7.12, 7.13 and 7.14.
    The main application to local patches (stars) in 2D and 3D relies on these topological and combinatorial facts, which are quoted or proved using the Schoenflies theorem and standard shellability results.
  • ad hoc to paper Lemma 8.1: the volume and height relations under barycentric subdivision of a subsimplex S are as stated; the paper explicitly says this is stated without proof.
    This unproved geometric lemma feeds into Proposition 8.2 and Proposition 8.3, and hence into the main recursive estimate of Theorem 9.3.
  • ad hoc to paper Proposition 8.2: each local star st_T(S) is star-shaped with respect to the ball B_{h/(ell+1)}(z_S), where h is the maximum height of any vertex of S within n-simplices of the star.
    This geometric property is proved in the paper using a planar kernel argument, and it is an essential input to the construction of the reflection Xi_1.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Computable Poincar\'e--Friedrichs constants for the $L^{p}$ de~Rham complex over convex domains and domains with shellable triangulations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DQWEOTSM

@misc{pith2026250806741,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Computable Poincar\'e--Friedrichs constants for the $L^p$ de~Rham complex over convex domains and domains with shellable triangulations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DQWEOTSM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.06741}
}
abstract

We construct potentials for the exterior derivative, in particular, for the gradient, the curl, and the divergence operators, over domains with shellable triangulations. Notably, the class of shellable triangulations includes local patches (stars) in two or three dimensions. The operator norms of our potentials satisfy explicitly computable bounds that depend only on the geometry. We thus compute upper bounds for constants in Poincar\'e--Friedrichs inequalities and lower bounds for the eigenvalues of vector Laplacians. As an additional result with independent standing, we establish Poincar\'e--Friedrichs inequalities with computable constants for the $L^{p}$ de~Rham complex over bounded convex domains, derived as explicit operator norms of regularized Poincar\'e and Bogovski\u{\i} potential operators. We express all our main results in the calculus of differential forms and treat the gradient, curl, and divergence operators as instances of the exterior derivative. Computational examples illustrate the theoretical findings.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.06741 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. From left to right: local patches around a vertex, and edge, and a triangle. The local patch of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Face-connected triangulation of a domain. The arrows depict a spanning tree in the face [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Left: manifold triangulation of an annulus. Right: not a manifold triangulation. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Illustration of Lemma 8.1. Left: the triangle T = [v0, v1, v2] is bisected at the edge S = [v0, v1], leading to two new triangles. The height vector to v2 in all three triangles remains the same. The height vector to zS in the new triangle [zS, v1, v2] is one half of t…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Illustration of Proposition 8.2 and its proof: for a convex vertex star, for a non-convex vertex star, both cases where the barycentric refinement of S has no effect, for a convex edge star, and for a non-convex edge star. zS zS zS zS and we are particularly interested…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Sketch of the geometric situation in the proof of Proposition [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p040_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Triangulations of 2D domains used in our numerical experiments. Dashed lines represent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p048_7.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Acosta, G., Dur´ an, R.G.: An optimal Poincar´ e inequality inL1 for convex domains. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 132(1), 195–202 (2004). DOI 10.1090/S0002-9939-03-07004-7. URL https://doi.org/ 10.1090/S0002-9939-03-07004-7

    work page doi:10.1090/s0002-9939-03-07004-7 2004

  2. [2]

    Combi- natorica 37(1), 1–30 (2017)

    Adiprasito, K.A., Benedetti, B.: Subdivisions, shellability, and collapsibility of products. Combi- natorica 37(1), 1–30 (2017). DOI 10.1007/s00493-016-3149-8. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00493-016-3149-8 52

    work page doi:10.1007/s00493-016-3149-8 2017

  3. [3]

    (MN-36), vol

    Akbulut, S., McCarthy, J.D.: Casson’s Invariant for Oriented Homology Three-Spheres: An Expo- sition. (MN-36), vol. 36. Princeton University Press (2014)

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    Acta Numer

    Arnold, D.N., Falk, R.S., Winther, R.: Finite element exterior calculus, homological techniques, and applications. Acta Numer. 15, 1–155 (2006). DOI 10.1017/S0962492906210018. URL https: //doi.org/10.1017/S0962492906210018

    doi:10.1017/s0962492906210018 2006

  5. [5]

    Arnold, D.N., Falk, R.S., Winther, R.: Geometric decompositions and local bases for spaces of finite element differential forms. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 198(21-26), 1660–1672 (2009). DOI 10.1016/j.cma.2008.12.017. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2008.12.017

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2008.12.017 2009

  6. [6]

    Arnold, D.N., Falk, R.S., Winther, R.: Finite element exterior calculus: from Hodge theory to numerical stability. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.) 47(2), 281–354 (2010). DOI 10.1090/ S0273-0979-10-01278-4. URL https://doi.org/10.1090/S0273-0979-10-01278-4

    doi:10.1090/s0273-0979-10-01278-4 2010

  7. [7]

    Arnold, D.N., Hu, K.: Complexes from complexes. Found. Comput. Math. 21(6), 1739–1774 (2021). DOI 10.1007/s10208-021-09498-9. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s10208-021-09498-9

    doi:10.1007/s10208-021-09498-9 2021

  8. [8]

    Discrete Math

    Bagchi, B., Datta, B.: Combinatorial triangulations of homology spheres. Discrete Math. 305(1-3), 1–17 (2005). DOI 10.1016/j.disc.2005.06.026. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.disc.2005.06. 026

    work page doi:10.1016/j.disc.2005.06.026 2005

Show all 73 references
  1. [9]

    Bebendorf, M.: A note on the Poincar´ e inequality for convex domains. Z. Anal. Anwendungen 22(4), 751–756 (2003). DOI 10.4171/ZAA/1170. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.4171/ZAA/1170

    2003 doi

  2. [10]

    Bogovski ˘ ı, M.E.: Solution of the first boundary value problem for an equation of continuity of an incompressible medium. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 248(5), 1037–1040 (1979)

    1979

  3. [11]

    Theorie, schnelle L¨ oser und Anwendungen in der Elastizit¨ atstheorie, 5th revised ed

    Braess, D.: Finite Elemente. Theorie, schnelle L¨ oser und Anwendungen in der Elastizit¨ atstheorie, 5th revised ed. edn. Springer-Lehrb. Mastercl. Berlin: Springer Spektrum (2013). DOI 10.1007/ 978-3-642-34797-9

    2013

  4. [12]

    Braess, D., Pillwein, V., Sch¨ oberl, J.: Equilibrated residual error estimates are p-robust. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 198(13-14), 1189–1197 (2009). DOI 10.1016/j.cma.2008.12.010. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2008.12.010

    2009 doi

  5. [13]

    15, third edn

    Brenner, S.C., Scott, L.R.: The mathematical theory of finite element methods, Texts in Applied Mathematics, vol. 15, third edn. Springer, New York (2008). DOI 10.1007/978-0-387-75934-0. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-75934-0

    2008 doi

  6. [14]

    Bruggesser, H., Mani, P.: Shellable decompositions of cells and spheres. Math. Scand. 29, 197–205 (1972) (1971). DOI 10.7146/math.scand.a-11045. URL https://doi.org/10.7146/math.scand. a-11045

    1972 doi

  7. [15]

    Burenkov, V.I.: Sobolev spaces on domains, Teubner-Texte zur Mathematik [Teubner Texts in Mathematics] , vol. 137. B. G. Teubner Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, Stuttgart (1998). DOI 10.1007/978-3-663-11374-4. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-11374-4

    1998 doi

  8. [16]

    Canc` es, E., Dusson, G., Maday, Y., Stamm, B., Vohral ´ ık, M.: Guaranteed and robust a pos- teriori bounds for Laplace eigenvalues and eigenvectors: a unified framework. Numer. Math. 140(4), 1033–1079 (2018). DOI 10.1007/s00211-018-0984-0. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00211...

    2018 doi

  9. [17]

    Carstensen, C., Gedicke, J.: Guaranteed lower bounds for eigenvalues. Math. Comp. 83(290), 2605–2629 (2014). DOI 10.1090/S0025-5718-2014-02833-0. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/ S0025-5718-2014-02833-0

    2014 doi

  10. [18]

    Carstensen, C., Gedicke, J., Rim, D.: Explicit error estimates for Courant, Crouzeix-Raviart and Raviart-Thomas finite element methods. J. Comput. Math. 30(4), 337–353 (2012). DOI 10.4208/ jcm.1108-m3677. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.4208/jcm.1108-m3677 53

    2012 doi

  11. [19]

    Chaumont-Frelet, T., Vohral ´ ık, M.: Constrained and unconstrained stable discrete minimizations for p-robust local reconstructions in vertex patches in the de Rham complex. Found. Comput. Math. (2024). URL https://hal.inria.fr/hal-03749682. DOI 10.1007/s10208-024-09674-7

    2024 doi

  12. [20]

    Chernavsky, A.V., Leksine, V.P.: Unrecognizability of manifolds. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 141(3), 325–335 (2006). DOI 10.1016/j.apal.2005.12.011. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apal.2005. 12.011

    2006 doi

  13. [21]

    Chua, S.K., Wheeden, R.L.: Estimates of best constants for weighted Poincar´ e inequalities on convex domains. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 93(1), 197–226 (2006). DOI 10.1017/S0024611506015826. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0024611506015826

    2006 doi

  14. [22]

    Costabel, M., McIntosh, A.: On Bogovski ˘ ı and regularized Poincar´ e integral operators for de Rham complexes on Lipschitz domains. Math. Z. 265(2), 297–320 (2010). DOI 10.1007/s00209-009-0517-8. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00209-009-0517-8

    2010 doi

  15. [23]

    Demlow, A., Hirani, A.N.: A posteriori error estimates for finite element exterior calculus: the de Rham complex. Found. Comput. Math. 14(6), 1337–1371 (2014). DOI 10.1007/s10208-014-9203-2. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s10208-014-9203-2

    2014 doi

  16. [24]

    Approximation and Interpolation, Texts in Applied Mathematics, vol

    Ern, A., Guermond, J.L.: Finite Elements I. Approximation and Interpolation, Texts in Applied Mathematics, vol. 72. Springer International Publishing, Springer Nature Switzerland AG (2021). DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-56341-7. URL https://doi-org/10.1007/978-3-030-56341-7

    2021 doi

  17. [25]

    Ern, A., Vohral ´ ık, M.: Stable brokenH 1 and H(div) polynomial extensions for polynomial-degree- robust potential and flux reconstruction in three space dimensions. Math. Comp. 89(322), 551–594 (2020). DOI 10.1090/mcom/3482. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/mcom/3482

    2020 doi

  18. [26]

    Esposito, L., Nitsch, C., Trombetti, C.: Best constants in Poincar´ e inequalities for convex domains. J. Convex Anal. 20(1), 253–264 (2013). URL https://www.heldermann.de/JCA/JCA20/JCA201/ jca20016.htm

    2013

  19. [27]

    In: Handbook of Numerical Analysis, Vol

    Eymard, R., Gallou¨ et, T., Herbin, R.: Finite volume methods. In: Handbook of Numerical Analysis, Vol. VII, pp. 713–1020. North-Holland, Amsterdam (2000)

    2000

  20. [28]

    Fernandes, P., Gilardi, G.: Magnetostatic and electrostatic problems in inhomogeneous anisotropic media with irregular boundary and mixed boundary conditions. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 7(7), 957–991 (1997). DOI 10.1142/S0218202597000487. URL https://doi.org/10.1142/ S021...

    1997 doi

  21. [29]

    Atti Accad

    Ferone, V., Nitsch, C., Trombetti, C.: A remark on optimal weighted Poincar´ e inequalities for convex domains. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Lincei Mat. Appl. 23(4), 467–475 (2012). DOI 10.4171/RLM/640. URL https://doi.org/10.4171/RLM/640

    2012 doi

  22. [30]

    Friedrichs, K.O.: Differential forms on Riemannian manifolds. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 8, 551–590 (1955). DOI 10.1002/cpa.3160080408. URL https://doi.org/10.1002/cpa.3160080408

    1955 doi

  23. [31]

    Gaffney, M.P.: Hilbert space methods in the theory of harmonic integrals. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 78, 426–444 (1955). DOI 10.2307/1993072. URL https://doi.org/10.2307/1993072

    1955 doi

  24. [32]

    Gallistl, D., Olkhovskiy, V.: Computational lower bounds of the Maxwell eigenvalues. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 61(2), 539–561 (2023). DOI 10.1137/21M1461447. URL https://doi.org/10.1137/ 21M1461447

    2023 doi

  25. [33]

    ESAIM Math

    Gawlik, E., Holst, M.J., Licht, M.W.: Local finite element approximation of Sobolev differential forms. ESAIM Math. Model. Numer. Anal. 55(5), 2075–2099 (2021). DOI 10.1051/m2an/2021034. URL https://doi.org/10.1051/m2an/2021034

  26. [34]

    Girault, V., Raviart, P.A.: Finite element methods for Navier-Stokes equations, Springer Series in Computational Mathematics , vol. 5. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1986) 54

    1986

  27. [35]

    Goaoc, X., Pat´ ak, P., Pat´ akov´ a, Z., Tancer, M., Wagner, U.: Shellability is NP-complete. J. ACM 66(3), Art. 21, 18 (2019). DOI 10.1145/3314024. URL https://doi.org/10.1145/3314024

    2019 doi

  28. [36]

    Gol’dshtein, V., Mitrea, I., Mitrea, M.: Hodge decompositions with mixed boundary conditions and applications to partial differential equations on Lipschitz manifolds. J. Math. Sci. (N.Y.) 172(3), 347–400 (2011). DOI 10.1007/s10958-010-0200-y. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/ s109...

    2011 doi

  29. [37]

    Die Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, Band

    Greub, W.H.: Multilinear algebra. Die Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, Band

  30. [38]

    Gross, P.W., Kotiuga, P.R.: Electromagnetic theory and computation: a topological ap- proach, Mathematical Sciences Research Institute Publications , vol. 48. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004). DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511756337. URL https://doi.org/10.1017/ CBO9780511756337

    2004 doi

  31. [39]

    Guerini, P., Savo, A.: Eigenvalue and gap estimates for the Laplacian acting on p-forms. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 356(1), 319–344 (2004). DOI 10.1090/S0002-9947-03-03336-1. URL https: //doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9947-03-03336-1

    2004 doi

  32. [40]

    Guzm´ an, J., Salgado, A.J.: Estimation of the continuity constants for Bogovski ˘ ı and regularized Poincar´ e integral operators. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 502(1), Paper No. 125246, 36 (2021). DOI 10.1016/j.jmaa.2021.125246. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2021.125246

    2021

  33. [41]

    Acta Numer

    Hiptmair, R.: Finite elements in computational electromagnetism. Acta Numer. 11, 237–339 (2002). DOI 10.1017/S0962492902000041. URL https://doi.org/10.1017/S0962492902000041

    2002 doi

  34. [42]

    Hurri, R.: Poincar´ e domains in Rn. Ph.d. dissertation, University of Jyv¨ askyl¨ a (1988)

    1988

  35. [43]

    Kozlov, D.: Combinatorial algebraic topology, Algorithms and Computation in Mathematics , vol. 21. Springer, Berlin (2008). DOI 10.1007/978-3-540-71962-5. URL https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-3-540-71962-5

    2008 doi

  36. [44]

    Kuhn, H.W.: Some combinatorial lemmas in topology. IBM J. Res. Develop. 4, 508–524 (1960). DOI 10.1147/rd.45.0518. URL https://doi.org/10.1147/rd.45.0518

    1960 doi

  37. [45]

    Laugesen, R.S., Siudeja, B.A.: Minimizing Neumann fundamental tones of triangles: an optimal Poincar´ e inequality. J. Differential Equations249(1), 118–135 (2010). DOI 10.1016/j.jde.2010.02

    2010 doi

  38. [46]

    Journal of the ACM (JACM) 26(3), 415–421 (1979)

    Lee, D.T., Preparata, F.P.: An optimal algorithm for finding the kernel of a polygon. Journal of the ACM (JACM) 26(3), 415–421 (1979)

    1979

  39. [47]

    URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2010.02.020

    2010 doi

  40. [48]

    218, second edn

    Lee, J.M.: Introduction to smooth manifolds, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 218, second edn. Springer, New York (2013)

    2013

  41. [49]

    202, second edn

    Lee, J.M.: Introduction to topological manifolds, Graduate Texts in Mathematics , vol. 202, second edn. Springer, New York (2011). DOI 10.1007/978-1-4419-7940-7. URL https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-1-4419-7940-7

    2011 doi

  42. [50]

    Licht, M.W.: Smoothed projections and mixed boundary conditions. Math. Comp. 88(316), 607–635 (2019). DOI 10.1090/mcom/3330. URL https://doi.org/10.1090/mcom/3330

    2019 doi

  43. [51]

    Princeton Mathematical Series, vol

    Lefschetz, S.: Introduction to Topology. Princeton Mathematical Series, vol. 11. Princeton Univer- sity Press, Princeton, NJ (1949)

    1949

  44. [52]

    Liu, X.: A framework of verified eigenvalue bounds for self-adjoint differential operators. Appl. Math. Comput. 267, 341–355 (2015). DOI 10.1016/j.amc.2015.03.048. URL http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.amc.2015.03.048 55

    2015 doi

  45. [53]

    Licht, M.W.: On basis constructions in finite element exterior calculus. Adv. Comput. Math. 48(2), Paper No. 14, 36 (2022). DOI 10.1007/s10444-022-09926-6. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10444-022-09926-6

    2022 doi

  46. [54]

    Massey, W.S.: A basic course in algebraic topology, Graduate Texts in Mathematics , vol. 127. Springer-Verlag, New York (1991)

    1991

  47. [55]

    Liu, X., Kikuchi, F.: Analysis and estimation of error constants for P0 and P1 interpolations over triangular finite elements. J. Math. Sci. Univ. Tokyo 17(1), 27–78 (2010). URL http://www.ms. u-tokyo.ac.jp/journal/abstract/jms170102.html

    2010

  48. [56]

    Birkh¨ auser Verlag, Basel (1989)

    Mayer, K.H.: Algebraische Topologie. Birkh¨ auser Verlag, Basel (1989). DOI 10.1007/ 978-3-0348-9269-8. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-9269-8

    1989 doi

  49. [57]

    Matculevich, S., Repin, S.: Explicit constants in Poincar´ e-type inequalities for simplicial domains and application to a posteriori estimates. Comput. Methods Appl. Math. 16(2), 277–298 (2016). DOI 10.1515/cmam-2015-0037. URL https://doi.org/10.1515/cmam-2015-0037

    2016 doi

  50. [58]

    Springer New York (1977)

    Moise, E.E.: Geometric Topology in Dimensions 2 and 3. Springer New York (1977). DOI 10.1007/ 978-1-4612-9906-6. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-9906-6

    1977 doi

  51. [59]

    V: The triangulation theorem and Hauptvermutung

    Moise, E.E.: Affine structures in 3-manifolds. V: The triangulation theorem and Hauptvermutung. Ann. Math. (2) 56, 96–114 (1952). DOI 10.2307/1969769

    1952 doi

  52. [60]

    Payne, L.E., Weinberger, H.F.: An optimal Poincar´ e inequality for convex domains. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 5, 286–292 (1960)

    1960

  53. [61]

    Pauly, D., Valdman, J.: Poincar´ e-Friedrichs type constants for operators involving grad, curl, and div: theory and numerical experiments. Comput. Math. Appl. 79(11), 3027–3067 (2020). DOI 10.1016/j.camwa.2020.01.004. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2020.01.004

    2020 doi

  54. [62]

    Wiley-Interscience Series in Discrete Mathematics

    Schrijver, A.: Theory of linear and integer programming. Wiley-Interscience Series in Discrete Mathematics. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester (1986). A Wiley-Interscience Publication

    1986

  55. [63]

    In: Interpreting G¨ odel, pp

    Poonen, B.: Undecidable problems: a sampler. In: Interpreting G¨ odel, pp. 211–241. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge (2014)

    2014

  56. [64]

    Stern, A.: Lp change of variables inequalities on manifolds. Math. Inequal. Appl. 16(1), 55–67 (2013). DOI 10.7153/mia-16-04. URL https://doi.org/10.7153/mia-16-04

    2013 doi

  57. [65]

    Siebenmann, L., Sullivan, D.: On complexes that are Lipschitz manifolds, pp. 503–525. Academic Press, New York-London (1979)

    1979

  58. [66]

    Veeser, A., Verf¨ urth, R.: Poincar´ e constants for finite element stars. IMA J. Numer. Anal. 32(1), 30–47 (2012). DOI 10.1093/imanum/drr011. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/imanum/drr011

    2012 doi

  59. [67]

    Stern, A.: Banach space projections and Petrov-Galerkin estimates. Numer. Math. 130(1), 125–133 (2015). DOI 10.1007/s00211-014-0658-5. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s00211-014-0658-5

    2015 doi

  60. [68]

    URL https://hal.inria.fr/hal-04436063

    Vohral ´ ık, M.:p-robust equivalence of global continuous and local discontinuous approximation, a p-stable local projector, and optimal elementwise hp approximation estimates in H 1 (2025). URL https://hal.inria.fr/hal-04436063. HAL Preprint 04436063, submitted for publication

    2025

  61. [69]

    Vohral ´ ık, M.: On the discrete Poincar´ e–Friedrichs inequalities for nonconforming approximations of the Sobolev space H 1. Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 26(7-8), 925–952 (2005). DOI 10.1080/ 01630560500444533. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01630560500444533

    2005 doi

  62. [70]

    Xu, J., Zikatanov, L.: Some observations on Babuˇ ska and Brezzi theories. Numer. Math. 94(1), 195–202 (2003). DOI 10.1007/s002110100308. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s002110100308

    2003 doi

  63. [71]

    Weber, C.: A local compactness theorem for Maxwell’s equations. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 2(1), 12–25 (1980). DOI 10.1002/mma.1670020103. URL https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.1670020103

    1980 doi

  64. [73]

    Ziegler, G.M.: Lectures on polytopes, Graduate Texts in Mathematics , vol. 152. Springer- Verlag, New York (1995). DOI 10.1007/978-1-4613-8431-1. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ 978-1-4613-8431-1 56

    1995 doi

  65. [136]

    Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., New York (1967)

    1967

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.